This time of year is anyone else reminded of the classic South Park episode “Vote or Die”? It’s always been funny to me how the messaging you see isn’t “educate yourself and vote” but merely “vote!”. Basically, just choose a name even if you have no idea bc that’s the American way! I did that the first time I voted, I hardly cared about the president let alone some school board member but I made my ignorant voice heard! Does anyone else find this amusing how we’re basically encouraging people to merely pick a name, any name because it’s your civic duty?
Vote or Die!
- Thread starter QuaZ2002
- Start date
- Status
It’s why I now prefer early mail in voting. Can discect each race and candidate from the comfort of my office and vote accordingly. Done are the days (for me at least) where voting completely down the party line is going to happen.
Early voting is far easier. Less crowds and like you said you have time to research candidates and issues. I went in last week and was the only one there aside from the 10 poll workers and a crazy lady outside telling me Jesus was coming on Tuesday.
I hardly thing it's far easier to stand at a kiosk and flip back and forth from your ballot to doing research on your mobile device for the 30 random things on the ballot. Sure you could make a cheat sheet at home and take it with you but at that point isn't it just easier to fill in the bubbles from your sofa?
As far as the crazy lady, I had Uber tell me the same thing and sure enough Jesus arrived, in a Toyota Prius no less! Wasn't the best driver.
Last edited:
It's a law in some countries, (Brazil), that voting is mandatory.
Too many vagaries around early voting, mail-in voting and all of the rest.
With all of the technology that enables banks and credit card companies to ACCURATELY handle hundreds of millions of transactions EVERY SINGLE DAY, it's crazy to me that the states still use a host of disparate systems that often lead to delayed and disputed results.
With all of the technology that enables banks and credit card companies to ACCURATELY handle hundreds of millions of transactions EVERY SINGLE DAY, it's crazy to me that the states still use a host of disparate systems that often lead to delayed and disputed results.
Just assume anything the government is in charge of will be maximum inefficient. Privatize voting tabulation and you’d know the night of.
I have not had any issues with our voting system here in Los Angeles. My ballot shows up in the mail with a voters guide a few weeks before election day. I take my time working through the voters guide; I complete the ballot; I drop the ballot in the box; and then I get a confirmation from the registrar via text when my ballot has been processed. Super smooth and easy.
Voted for the first time in SC about a week before Election Day. Some school board candidates a little closer to the entrance than I’m used to seeing but no big deal. In North Carolina we used to fill in the little ovals with black pen. Down here they give you cotton swabs to dab the electronic screen. When I asked the lady at check in what they were for she said I had to take a COVID test😉. Good one! Had me going for a minute.
Voting the day of at my location is far easier than early voting. I tried multiple times to go early and every time I went the line was to the parking lot. On election day I was in and out in less than 10 minutes.
Since everything is electronic these days, I still don't understand why we need to have a specific voting location. I should be able to go anywhere in Georgia and have my ballot pulled up so I can vote.
As for encouraging people to vote without doing research, it doesn't makes sense to me. We should actually be encouraging people that don't do research to stay home and not vote. I hate seeing the commercials here basically bullying people into voting. "If you don't vote, your neighbors & family members will be able to see that online. Do you want everyone to know you didn't vote?" Seriously, is that what we have come to these days?
I still don't trust mail in voting. I understand why people that will be out of town need to vote by mail, but I don't understand why people that drive their ballot to the voting location to drop it off can't just vote in person. Now if we figure out a way to enforce people to submit (drop off or mail) their own ballot, that would be another story. I can't think of a good valid reason one person would be dropping off multiple ballots at the same time...and yes I have seen it with my own eyes.
Since everything is electronic these days, I still don't understand why we need to have a specific voting location. I should be able to go anywhere in Georgia and have my ballot pulled up so I can vote.
As for encouraging people to vote without doing research, it doesn't makes sense to me. We should actually be encouraging people that don't do research to stay home and not vote. I hate seeing the commercials here basically bullying people into voting. "If you don't vote, your neighbors & family members will be able to see that online. Do you want everyone to know you didn't vote?" Seriously, is that what we have come to these days?
I still don't trust mail in voting. I understand why people that will be out of town need to vote by mail, but I don't understand why people that drive their ballot to the voting location to drop it off can't just vote in person. Now if we figure out a way to enforce people to submit (drop off or mail) their own ballot, that would be another story. I can't think of a good valid reason one person would be dropping off multiple ballots at the same time...and yes I have seen it with my own eyes.
So you’re arguing for a national standard? Sure, let’s do that. So long as it’s based on a sane and inclusive state design - like here in CA.
Everybody who has a driver's license gets a ballot.
At a minimum cross reference voting ballots sent by the DMV with addresses in the United States postal service system. If the postal service doesn't think you live there then the address on your driver's license should be considered wrong.
Mandate passports for all voters. This would ensure only US citizens voted but would not guarantee address for local or state elections. But the postal service could do that. Passport cost about $70 and the government could pay for that for those that can't afford it or for everybody. Passport valid for 10 years so $7 a year. Put that as a tax to get a driver's license. Politicians spend more than that per vote over 10 years anyways.
Is validation of voter signature all that is required?
There's no excuse for the delays out west. Florida with spans two time zones can count votes and hours. Texas which is the fourth or third largest state in the country can do the same.
I just do not care about “delays” in learning the outcomes of elections, at all. Whether they announce the winner the day after the election or a month after the election is inconsequential to me. I much prefer giving as many people the opportunity to vote as easily and conveniently as possible and then taking however much time is necessary to count the votes accurately and completely to having news organizations call the elections as soon as possible.
Nothing here really makes any sense. Why tie voting to a driver's license when not everyone drives, or has a license? Why remove all college voters because their current address doesn't match their driver's license? Mandate passports? In addition to driver's license?
The delays 'out west' are because republican's changed voting laws. Arizona is a shit show because of republican's intentionally messing with the system. AZ used to have ~80% mail in ballots and results were quicker because most ballots were counted before election day but election deniers made a big stink and told replublicans that they need to vote in person on election day to avoid having their votes stolen. They did...and now people have to count ballots all week long when it's a very close race.
FL, TX and CA can all tally votes 'quickly' because there aren't very many close races. The races are called long before the last vote is counted.
You want to base national voting off a successful system base it off of CA's. Everyone who wants one gets a ballot weeks before the election along with a pamphlet describing all the issues being voted on with blurbs from both sides of the issue. Tons of voting locations so there's never hours long lines. Most people are registered when they get their driver's license.
*****
Nothing here really makes any sense. Why tie voting to a driver's license when not everyone drives, or has a license? Why remove all college voters because their current address doesn't match their driver's license? Mandate passports? In addition to driver's license?
*******
California DMV sends ballots to everyone with a DL or state ID unless the person opts out. There are other methods to register. I am not claiming that DLs should be required to vote and only commenting on how ballots are sent.
If one is too lazy to keep their address current via moves, then they are should be qualified as too lazy to vote. I never changed voter registration while attending FSU and voted in my home county. Probably illegal.
Passport mandates are an option. How else to prove US citizenship? DL won't do it. A passport would be preferable to a DL.
I received a ballot for my landlord at the place I rent. He lives out of state. Maybe I should have cast a vote for him ;^). The state wouldn't catch it because they don't know if we are roommates. If there were questions, they could validate the signature, but I could copy his signature from the lease.
If this was a presidential election, I suspect he could have voted in his home state and I could have voted for him in Florida.
Nothing here really makes any sense. Why tie voting to a driver's license when not everyone drives, or has a license? Why remove all college voters because their current address doesn't match their driver's license? Mandate passports? In addition to driver's license?
*******
California DMV sends ballots to everyone with a DL or state ID unless the person opts out. There are other methods to register. I am not claiming that DLs should be required to vote and only commenting on how ballots are sent.
If one is too lazy to keep their address current via moves, then they are should be qualified as too lazy to vote. I never changed voter registration while attending FSU and voted in my home county. Probably illegal.
Passport mandates are an option. How else to prove US citizenship? DL won't do it. A passport would be preferable to a DL.
I received a ballot for my landlord at the place I rent. He lives out of state. Maybe I should have cast a vote for him ;^). The state wouldn't catch it because they don't know if we are roommates. If there were questions, they could validate the signature, but I could copy his signature from the lease.
If this was a presidential election, I suspect he could have voted in his home state and I could have voted for him in Florida.
That's a lot of effort to fix a problem that doesn't exist. There is no widespread voter fraud. CA's system works great.
Just because you can break the law if you're inclined to doesn't mean we need to spend billions to make it slightly harder when there is no evidence the current system is being affected.
I'm not sure the DL thing would work based on not everyone driving but I think everyone should have ID to vote that validates citizenship. If that means a voter ID or state Id card that's fine. There should be 1 ID for your state and everything can be linked to it like DL, voting and even conceal carry permits ect... Mail in ballots should be reserved for out of country folks that can vote like military or foreign service workers. Whatever system you use doesn't matter as long as you can count the votes. Just because there isn't widespread fraud that we know of doesn't mean the system cant be improved.
So you're good with a national ID card? That's usually a third rail for conservatives.
Again, you suggest changes to a system that works for no reason. Why shouldn't I be able to vote via mail? There has been no widespread mail-in voter fraud. Should I be inconvenienced just because right wing TV is promoting an irrational fear?
Doesn't have to do with left or right. Your letting your political views interfere with rational thought. I didn't say national ID I said 1 ID that would replace several and under our system it would have to be at the state level. Why have multiple systems cover something that can be done with one?
The voting thing is my own opinion. I don't pay a lot of attention to the news or media as they all have a vested interest to skew what they report based on their own views. Fox, CNN, MSNBC are all guilty of spreading fear and misinformation. Voting is a civic duty not an inconvenience if your that bothered by the process don't do it. In my opinion to ensure the most secure process available you should vote in person with an ID.
If you want to discuss an issue fine but save the left and right banter.
I mentioned right wing tv because they are the ones who are promoting the idea that the current system is not secure. There is no evidence of any widespread fraud so why would we impose additional restrictions on it when we already have pitiful turnout. Vote by mail increases participation, it should be encouraged.
"The most secure process available" would include some sort of biometric testing for every individual each time they vote. We agree that's ridiculous don't we? Why would you want to increase barriers to participation when the current system is working?
Does every state require citizenship to vote? Do all states require ID to verify? Again, I disagree on mail in ballots, we should utilize it but on a limited scale. Sheer numbers isn't he answer to poor turnout. Getting people out that want to vote is the key. I don't see how requiring an ID to vote is a restriction its something you should already have or you shouldn't vote.
Last edited:
Is the first a real question? I believe NY wanted to allow non-citizens to be able to vote on local issues but that was struck down.
No, all states handle it differently. Those with a Jim Crow history tend to be more restrictive.
If you can't agree that more people participating in elections is a good thing I don't think we have much common ground. People should have a say in their government. Impediments to that voice are bad. Especially when they are arbitrary and capricious.
There are around 300 million voting age people in the us without driver's license - in your world they don't get a vote. Why?
Show me that there is a problem with the current system before you disenfranchise hundreds of millions of people.
Requiring ID isn’t disenfranchisement of any number of people. It’s something everyone should have anyway. ID not driver license.
Junior High, we were voting for class officers. The principal brought in an actual voting booth. He stood outside as each student went into the booth and then timed them with a stopwatch announcing the amount of time it took for the student to vote.
Yes, you should be prepared with the knowledge of who you will vote for prior to voting. But that was totally the wrong message being sent by the principal; vote fast, don't be concerned about voting accurately.
Yes, you should be prepared with the knowledge of who you will vote for prior to voting. But that was totally the wrong message being sent by the principal; vote fast, don't be concerned about voting accurately.
Pretty sure you have to show some kind of ID to get welfare and food stamps. No?
Yeah I think that’s off by a bunch
^^^^There are just over 300,000,000 people in the entire damned country. Voting-age people lacking a driver’s license — or some reasonable form of ID — is a pretty small population.
We should not create some crazy-ass system to accommodate the relative sliver of folks who cannot or will not get ID.
I simply do not think that a person should be required to present an ID to vote. I think that we should always err on the side of greater freedom and accessibility in voting, absent a major, documented threat to the integrity of the election, and I have seen no evidence of a major, documented threat to integrity of any election in which I have participated.
Given the documented history of systemic voter suppression, the sustained resistance to increasing voter access and participation in this country, and the apparent desire to return to more restrictive measures and strategies, my stance against requiring ID and all other impediments is hardening.
Given the documented history of systemic voter suppression, the sustained resistance to increasing voter access and participation in this country, and the apparent desire to return to more restrictive measures and strategies, my stance against requiring ID and all other impediments is hardening.
And I think a voter should have to show ID and have to go physically vote unless mobility or military assignment prevent one from doing that.
And this is why I am glad to live where I live, and I am sure that you are glad to live where you live. Let us please agree to oppose any attempt to enforce a federal standard beyond that which is in the US Constitution on our individual states with regard to voting.
Shouldn't voting be made as easy as possible? Where in the constitution or in any law does it call for it to be restrictive?
Sorry one too many zeros- about 30 million. Still a lot of people.
I wonder if one of the goals of that exercise was to impress upon the kids that they should be paying attention to the candidates, their campaign, and the issues to be voted on ahead of getting in that booth and just standing there trying to decide? You know, being an involved citizen?
It already is very easy to vote.
I also would not want a federal mandate on standardized voting.
Yeah, you need to accommodate that relative sliver! You know why? Because ID or not those people are citizens. Period. And I’ll go you one better. Voting is voluntary. And NO ONE has a right to purge your registration from the roles if you choose not to vote for 1,2 or 12 elections.
It's obviously very easy for you to vote but the rules you want to place on others may keep it from being easy for them. Their vote is as important as yours.
There was nothing in that whole process to indicate it was anything but knowing who you are voting for prior to entering the booth but also doing it fast. It was not an exercise in impressing on the students to do research on who you are voting for.
I agree about knowing ahead of time who you are voting for and doing the research about whom you are voting. If that was an intention of the principal, he sure did not make any reference to that aspect at all and should have made that point well before the day of the election.
Instead he was just belting out loudly the amount of time it took each student to pull the levers on the three or four races.
Just odd to me that anyone would want a system that does not account for who is voting. You know, to make sure that each person only votes once. How do you police “that” if you don’t even know who is voting?
I can’t help but think- as a former high school teacher myself - that the lesson plan included a run up to the actual voting some discussion had not taken place back in the classroom preparing the students for the event. Otherwise it had little educational value.
- Status
